The author is a Forbes contributor. The opinions expressed are those of the writer.

Loading ...

Loading ...

This story appears in the {{article.article.magazine.pretty_date}} issue of {{article.article.magazine.pubName}}. Subscribe

Image via Wikipedia

Pop quiz. A professional man holds the door open for a female colleague. Is that sexist? A husband always insists on driving during tiring trips to save his wife the effort. Is that sexist? What about that nice guy on the train who stands to allow a woman he’s never met to sit down. Is that sexist?

New research has sparked fiery debate over a question I’ve long been unable to answer: Is chivalry sexist? The study, conducted by two female psychologists from Pennsylvania State University and Philipps University Marburg in Germany, sought to examine how much people recognize sexism on a daily basis and if awareness of sexist exchanges altered their perspective.

Male and female college students were asked to record instances of both "blatant sexism"—derogatory name-calling, unwanted sexual advances—and "benevolent sexism." The latter is a 15-year-old concept that refers to "a paternalistic attitude towards women that idealizes them affectionately," according to The Huffington Post. It includes well-intentioned behavior or philosophies that differentiate women as needing special consideration, having feminine skills or as being vulnerable. Women needing to be protected by men or rescued first in a disaster were examples cited in the study.

After becoming more aware of blatant and benevolent forms of "sexism" around them, women tended to view the behaviors as inappropriate. Men, however, did not believe the "benevolent" incidents were sexist.

The study itself has started a small controversy on the Web. A thoughtful piece on HuffPost Women received over 2,400 comments; a Daily Mailstory about it is titled, “Men who hold open doors for women are SEXIST not chivalrous, feminists claim;” and another on the blog Chicks on the Right, “How DARE You Open The Door For Me, You Sexist Jerk?!?!,” oozes contempt that a man’s “compliments and helpfulness” could be deemed negative.

When women still face a lifetime wage gap of almost half a million dollars, is it absurd to be concerned with well-meaning men who don’t want wives and mothers to do the heavy lifting?

It’s true that men and women are biologically different. So should they be treated as such? Part of me feels that, with the monthly pains, likely childbearing and perpetual double standards of womanhood, I am owed some grocery lifting, pedestal placing and occasional spider killing by the men in my life. Likewise, certain gendered behaviors have such deep roots in romanticism—he pays on the first date, he gets down on one knee—I would truly be sad to see them go.

The danger, however, is if gallantry begets the notion that women are less than or need special favors in order to succeed. Men and women might subconsciously receive that message and carry it with them to their schoolyards, workplaces and marriages. If your girlfriend is too “delicate” to change a tire, is a female manager too “weak” to run your board? And if you believe that he should pay for dinner, are you more willing to accept a lower salary?

Because I would answer yes, that would be sexist.

Readers: Weigh in. Can chivalry be sexist? What's the danger? And where's the line?